Wednesday, October 10, 2012

Frequent reader(s) of this blog know the futility of planning as it calls down upon us the wrath of the gods of uncertainty...erm...we mean know that on several occasions we have delighted you with tales from our desultory youth. Or given you the excuse to put off doing something productive for a few more moments, and we're OK with that, accepting purpose where it finds us.

All this is by way of saying even though we felt fate had dealt us the role of Eddie Haskel in the great Leave It To Beaver of existence, we never felt our lives were in danger, only our posteriors.

To save space, I've omitted the Biblical citation for Republican legislator Charlie Fuqua, running again for legislature's endorsement of the death penalty for rebellious children. Fuqua doesn't think execution would have to be used often on children who defied their parents, but suggests the deterrent effect of its legality would be beneficial.

Doesn't think it would have to be used often? How very Post Bronze Age of him. And as for the "deterrent effect" we can just see the conversations in the cafetorium now? "Billy won't be coming to the party this Saturday, man."
"Why not?"
"He missed curfew for the third time this month."
"Bummer. What is he, grounded?"
"Naw man, his dad shot him."
"Whoa. That's harsh."

This passage does not give parents blanket authority to kill their
children. They must follow the proper procedure in order to have the
death penalty executed against their children.

"Proper procedure?" What, are there forms to fill out? Where does one acquire these forms, the government? "Excuse me, I'd like to pick up supplemental tax form 88B and an application to whack my kid."
"Yes sir, and you gonna ice the punk by gunshot, lethal injection, or just run over the ungrateful miscreant with your car?"
"Give me the car one. We're going to visit his grandparents over the holidays and well, let's just say that disrespectful heathen isn't coming back."

Even though this procedure would rarely be used, if it were the law of
land, it would give parents authority. Children would know that their
parents had authority and it would be a tremendous incentive for
children to give proper respect to their parents.

Well, it is true parents don't have any authority over their children. Especially since the union got ratified. We mean, just try and change the work rules so little Johnnie has to take out the trash without a corresponding increase in his allowance. Boom! You'll find yourself in front of the Labor Relations Board so fast you'll think you're Michael T. Duke at a UFCW meeting.

It would seem like we could work something out here without, you know, infanticide and stuff. There's got to be a middle ground. How about this: Muslims don't ice people right away. Say you get caught stealing something, they'll just cut off your hand. Couldn't we come up with something like that? You know, if the kid forgets to trim the bushes after he mows the lawn dad goes all Kunta Kinte on his toes.

Oh wait, we forgot, Islam is a barbaric religion. Wouldn't want to go copying any of their practices. Besides, they already off their kids, although it's only the girls so, you know, biblically based killings are equal opportunity killings. Yay Jesus!